Boulder Marshall Fire Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Xcel Energy by Denver Injury Law LLC-Largest Negligence Damages Case in Colorado History

Posted on by jwavery

NOTICE: Boulder Town Hall Meeting, Apr. 9, 2022, 2:00p to 5:00p, at Tandoori Grill, 619 S. Broadway (SW corner of Table Mesa Blvd and Broadway).

BREAKING NEWS: APRIL 9, 2022: Denver Injury Law LLC and Schack Law Group have learned from eyewitnesses that the PSC_Xcel property on the upwind outskirts of Superior was covered with tons of dry wood chips that caught fire and blew burning embers into the air with 100+ mph winds creating an inferno on the upwind edge of town. Details of the Boulder Fire Class Action lawsuit below. See Link-Click Here for breaking news.

Download a Class Action Fee Contract (to Join)

Representation-Agreement-Contingent-Fee-Blank-2Download

Class Action Victim Compensation Hotline-Call: (720)921-0555

3/31/22, Boulder Colorado.

In what appears to be the largest damages lawsuit in Colorado history, Denver Injury Law, LLC @ Boulder and Schack Law Group of San Diego, California filed the lawsuit today, a class action, on behalf of victims of the Boulder Marshall Wildfire against Xcel Energy. The suit alleges Xcel was negligent in its maintenance of power lines in the vicinity of Highway 93 at the intersection of Highway 170 near Eldorado Springs, and that the fire terrorized and damaged the plaintiffs. Over 1,000 homes and businesses were destroyed, and 6,000 acres burned. One person is reported dead and another remains missing after the fire. The lawsuit seeks to establish a class of victims, or will advance individual claims of the named plaintiffs. Total property losses are estimated at Five Hundred Million Dollars ($500,000,000.00). Individual plaintiffs can claim up to $642,180 each for non-economic losses under state law. Exemplary damages can equal 1:1 (doubling the award), if permitted. Litigation costs are also recoverable. “This negligence damages case will likely exceed $1 billion,” according to James Avery, Denver’s Top Trial Lawyertm, and lead trial counsel in the case. Update: October, 2022 the state updated its loss figure to $2 Billion.

The lawsuit has garnered significant media attention. A Town Hall will be hosted by the law firms representing the plaintiffs on Wednesday, April 6, 2022, 5:30-7:00 p.m. at Tandoori Grill, 619 S. Broadway, south Boulder (near King Soopers shopping center). A hotline has been established for victims to register for information about the lawsuit or join the litigation. Insurance claims also accepted. Call 720-921-0555. Victims may also complete the contact form below to connect with Denver Injury Law, LLC and Denver’s Top Trial Lawyer James Avery (Counsel of Record in the Class Action lawsuit).

Recent news: Denver Injury Law LLC (DIL) and Schack Law Group have successfully defeated a motion to dismiss filed by Public Service Company of Colorado to dismiss the lawsuit, which alleged the claims to be groundless. The District Judge ruled the lawsuit stated numerous viable claims against Public Service Co. of Colorado. A motion to dismiss filed by Xcel Energy Inc. (MN) as parent company are still pending and being defended by DIL and Schack. A copy of the Order can be viewed by clicking on this link:

Order Denying Motion to Dismiss.

Order-re-PSC-MTDDownload

The completion of a contact form does not establish an attorney-client relationship, but all communications will be kept confidential as prospective client communications.

The case has garnered immediate national publicity. News stories suggest two ignition points (both in the vicinity of Xcel Energy power line alleged in the lawsuit to have crossed). Top stories:

Other stories:

Breaking news on Class Action lawsuit against Xcel Energy.
Xcel Wood Chip Dump Inferno
The Denver Post, Apr. 1, 2022

Denver Top Trial Lawyer James Avery

@bouldermarshallwildfire

2022-03-31-14-47-57-Xcel-Class-Complaint-filing-copyDownload
Boulder-County-CGIA- NoticeDownload

Apr. 8, 2022- The 20th Judicial District in Boulder Bench has recused itself from this case. The case will be transferred to another district or a retired Judge.

Judges recuse themselves when they take no part in deciding cases that they would otherwise help decide. The Due Process clauses of the United States Constitution require judges to recuse themselves from cases in two situations:

  1. Where the judge has a financial interest in the case’s outcome.
  2. Where there is otherwise a strong possibility that the judge’s decision will be biased.

In either case, it does not matter whether or not the judge is actually biased. What matters is that even if the judge is not biased, the high probability of bias still damages the integrity of the judicial system. Any party in a lawsuit may request that a judge recuse him or herself.

The Supreme Court addressed recusal in the 2009 case Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co. (08-22). 

In addition, the Constitution of the State of Colorado, Art. XXIX, Sec. 1 provides:

(1) The people of the state of Colorado hereby find and declare that: (a) The conduct of public officers, members of the general assembly, local government officials, and government employees must hold the respect and confidence of the people; (b) They shall carry out their duties for the benefit of the people of the state; (c) They shall, therefore, avoid conduct that is in violation of their public trust or that creates a justifiable impression among members of the public that such trust is being violated; (d) …

Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 97 provides:

A judge shall be disqualified in an action in which he is interested or prejudiced, or has been of counsel for any party, or is or has been a material witness, or is so related or connected with any party or his attorney as to render it improper for him to sit on the trial, appeal, or other proceeding therein. A judge may disqualify himself on his own motion for any of said reasons,…Upon disqualifying himself, a judge shall notify forthwith the chief judge of the district who shall assign another judge in the district to hear the action. If no other judge in the district is available or qualified, the chief judge shall notify forthwith the court administrator who shall obtain from the Chief Justice the assignment of a replacement judge.

Order-Bench-RecusalDownload